Activity+2

=Activity 2: The Electronic Learning Community =

Listen to this Activity media type="file" key="OlsonJELT7008-2.mp3" align="left" width="240" height="20"

The electronic learning community today looks nothing like it did 10 years ago and looks nothing like it will in another 10 years. Electronic learning, which once held an aura of being less rigorous, has been developed into a highly technical and sophisticated educational alternative which is comparable to a traditional classroom (Palloff & Pratt, 2007, p. 3). It is not without collaboration that makes online education rank with the traditional classroom. Palloff and Pratt (2005) noted that “in the online environment, collaboration can be seen as the cornerstone of the educational experience” (p. xi). Bender (2003) confirms the notion of collaboration as an integral part of e-learning by noting a study which directly linked student success with the concept of community in the e-classroom (p. 7). It is clear that the electronic learning community is modeled after the traditional classroom but has been adapted for a different delivery medium.

Just as there are many similarities, there are also apparent differences between the traditional face-to-face classroom community and the online community. Patton and Lesage (2010) identified that there are clear distinctions between effective online and face-to-face teaching methodologies and that there is not a “one-fits all type approach” (p. 193). Key differences include communication, information literacy requirements, and cognitivity and affectivity.

In the digital age everyone can be instantly connected at the touch of a button. This concept has been applied to educational institutions as well. Patton and Lesage (2010) noted that in an online course, students can connect and communicate with an instructor any time, any day compared to the traditional classroom where communication can only take place during specific hours of the day or week (p. 198).

With the integration of technology in the traditional classroom, some students are challenged with a lack of skills effectively utilizing technology. Although students remain in the traditional classroom, many instructors have begun giving final exams and other assessments via computer or web based programs to reduce time allotted to grading and improve feedback turn around. It may be beneficial for some students, but others see this as another hurdle. Burkhardt, Kinnie, and Cournoyer (2008) found that students who choose online courses do so because they are familiar and confident with technology whereas students in a face-to-face course often struggle when given a computer based test (p. 387).

Students enjoy taking online courses over face to face courses. Levenberg and Caspi (2010) predicted that the learning medium has no impact on the cognitive aspect and that the face to face environment is preferred by learners (p. 329). Through their research they disproved their prediction stating, “we found that online learning scored higher than face-to-face learning in both the cognitive and the affective aspects” (p. 329). Today’s student is nothing like students 10 years ago and today’s student will be nothing like students in 10 years. Students today have grown up with technology and are fluent with integrating technology into all aspects of their lives. It is palpable that technology in education should be no different.

It is also important to note that online learning more openly allows for nonlinear learning as Bender (2003) found (p. 32). In nonlinear learning, students are able to progress through portions of the class at their own pace while reverting back to previous lessons to complete asynchronous discussions and other activities. In the traditional classroom it is very difficult to disseminate coursework in a nonlinear fashion.

The online learning process and the instructor’s role have also changed over the years. Patton and Lesage (2010) noted, “years ago, the instructor was there to impart knowledge for the student to memorize…today’s instructor is a facilitator or guide as students construct their own knowledge” (p. 194). This can be more readily seen in the online classroom as a typical instructor does not lecture or have one hour video lectures for the students to watch and memorize facts for the test. In a traditional classroom it is relatively easy to build a community as classmates tend to socialize prior to and after class in addition to classroom discussion and activities. It is vital to integrate community building activities on all levels in the online classroom. As previously noted, Bender (2003) identified community in the online classroom as a paramount element for success (p. 7). What wasn’t discussed is the difficulty in developing effective online community. Palloff and Pratt (2007) noted, “the formation of online communities without face-to-face contact demands greater attention up front” (p. 33). The primary role for an instructor at the onset of any course should be to develop effective community and collaboration.

References Bender, T. (2003). //Discussion-based online teaching to enhance studnet learning//. Sterling, VI: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Burkhardt, J. M., Kinnie, J., & Cournoyer, C. M. (2008). Information literacy successes compared: Online vs. face to face. //Journal of Library Administration//, 48(3/4), 379-389. Retrieved from EBSCO//host//.

Levenberg, A., & Caspi, A. (2010). Comparing perceived formal and informal learning in face-to-face versus online environments. //Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning & Learning Objects//, 6323-333. Retrieved from EBSCO//host//.

Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2005). //Collaborating online//. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2007). //Building online learning communitites//. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 11pt; margin: auto 0in auto 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;">Patton, B., & Lesage, T. (2010). Are you a dream come true or a nightmare? Desired characteristics in the face to face and online instructor. //Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE)//, 11(4), 193-200. Retrieved from EBSCO//host//.